wireguard-linux/fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c, branch jd/unified-crypt-queue

btrfs: use nofs allocations for running delayed items

2020-03-25T15:26:00Z

Zygo reported the following lockdep splat while testing the balance patches ====================================================== WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected 5.6.0-c6f0579d496a+ #53 Not tainted ------------------------------------------------------ kswapd0/1133 is trying to acquire lock: ffff888092f622c0 (&delayed_node->mutex){+.+.}, at: __btrfs_release_delayed_node+0x7c/0x5b0 but task is already holding lock: ffffffff8fc5f860 (fs_reclaim){+.+.}, at: __fs_reclaim_acquire+0x5/0x30 which lock already depends on the new lock. the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is: -> #1 (fs_reclaim){+.+.}: fs_reclaim_acquire.part.91+0x29/0x30 fs_reclaim_acquire+0x19/0x20 kmem_cache_alloc_trace+0x32/0x740 add_block_entry+0x45/0x260 btrfs_ref_tree_mod+0x6e2/0x8b0 btrfs_alloc_tree_block+0x789/0x880 alloc_tree_block_no_bg_flush+0xc6/0xf0 __btrfs_cow_block+0x270/0x940 btrfs_cow_block+0x1ba/0x3a0 btrfs_search_slot+0x999/0x1030 btrfs_insert_empty_items+0x81/0xe0 btrfs_insert_delayed_items+0x128/0x7d0 __btrfs_run_delayed_items+0xf4/0x2a0 btrfs_run_delayed_items+0x13/0x20 btrfs_commit_transaction+0x5cc/0x1390 insert_balance_item.isra.39+0x6b2/0x6e0 btrfs_balance+0x72d/0x18d0 btrfs_ioctl_balance+0x3de/0x4c0 btrfs_ioctl+0x30ab/0x44a0 ksys_ioctl+0xa1/0xe0 __x64_sys_ioctl+0x43/0x50 do_syscall_64+0x77/0x2c0 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xbe -> #0 (&delayed_node->mutex){+.+.}: __lock_acquire+0x197e/0x2550 lock_acquire+0x103/0x220 __mutex_lock+0x13d/0xce0 mutex_lock_nested+0x1b/0x20 __btrfs_release_delayed_node+0x7c/0x5b0 btrfs_remove_delayed_node+0x49/0x50 btrfs_evict_inode+0x6fc/0x900 evict+0x19a/0x2c0 dispose_list+0xa0/0xe0 prune_icache_sb+0xbd/0xf0 super_cache_scan+0x1b5/0x250 do_shrink_slab+0x1f6/0x530 shrink_slab+0x32e/0x410 shrink_node+0x2a5/0xba0 balance_pgdat+0x4bd/0x8a0 kswapd+0x35a/0x800 kthread+0x1e9/0x210 ret_from_fork+0x3a/0x50 other info that might help us debug this: Possible unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- lock(fs_reclaim); lock(&delayed_node->mutex); lock(fs_reclaim); lock(&delayed_node->mutex); *** DEADLOCK *** 3 locks held by kswapd0/1133: #0: ffffffff8fc5f860 (fs_reclaim){+.+.}, at: __fs_reclaim_acquire+0x5/0x30 #1: ffffffff8fc380d8 (shrinker_rwsem){++++}, at: shrink_slab+0x1e8/0x410 #2: ffff8881e0e6c0e8 (&type->s_umount_key#42){++++}, at: trylock_super+0x1b/0x70 stack backtrace: CPU: 2 PID: 1133 Comm: kswapd0 Not tainted 5.6.0-c6f0579d496a+ #53 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.12.0-1 04/01/2014 Call Trace: dump_stack+0xc1/0x11a print_circular_bug.isra.38.cold.57+0x145/0x14a check_noncircular+0x2a9/0x2f0 ? print_circular_bug.isra.38+0x130/0x130 ? stack_trace_consume_entry+0x90/0x90 ? save_trace+0x3cc/0x420 __lock_acquire+0x197e/0x2550 ? btrfs_inode_clear_file_extent_range+0x9b/0xb0 ? register_lock_class+0x960/0x960 lock_acquire+0x103/0x220 ? __btrfs_release_delayed_node+0x7c/0x5b0 __mutex_lock+0x13d/0xce0 ? __btrfs_release_delayed_node+0x7c/0x5b0 ? __asan_loadN+0xf/0x20 ? pvclock_clocksource_read+0xeb/0x190 ? __btrfs_release_delayed_node+0x7c/0x5b0 ? mutex_lock_io_nested+0xc20/0xc20 ? __kasan_check_read+0x11/0x20 ? check_chain_key+0x1e6/0x2e0 mutex_lock_nested+0x1b/0x20 ? mutex_lock_nested+0x1b/0x20 __btrfs_release_delayed_node+0x7c/0x5b0 btrfs_remove_delayed_node+0x49/0x50 btrfs_evict_inode+0x6fc/0x900 ? btrfs_setattr+0x840/0x840 ? do_raw_spin_unlock+0xa8/0x140 evict+0x19a/0x2c0 dispose_list+0xa0/0xe0 prune_icache_sb+0xbd/0xf0 ? invalidate_inodes+0x310/0x310 super_cache_scan+0x1b5/0x250 do_shrink_slab+0x1f6/0x530 shrink_slab+0x32e/0x410 ? do_shrink_slab+0x530/0x530 ? do_shrink_slab+0x530/0x530 ? __kasan_check_read+0x11/0x20 ? mem_cgroup_protected+0x13d/0x260 shrink_node+0x2a5/0xba0 balance_pgdat+0x4bd/0x8a0 ? mem_cgroup_shrink_node+0x490/0x490 ? _raw_spin_unlock_irq+0x27/0x40 ? finish_task_switch+0xce/0x390 ? rcu_read_lock_bh_held+0xb0/0xb0 kswapd+0x35a/0x800 ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x4c/0x60 ? balance_pgdat+0x8a0/0x8a0 ? finish_wait+0x110/0x110 ? __kasan_check_read+0x11/0x20 ? __kthread_parkme+0xc6/0xe0 ? balance_pgdat+0x8a0/0x8a0 kthread+0x1e9/0x210 ? kthread_create_worker_on_cpu+0xc0/0xc0 ret_from_fork+0x3a/0x50 This is because we hold that delayed node's mutex while doing tree operations. Fix this by just wrapping the searches in nofs. CC: stable@vger.kernel.org # 4.4+ Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik Reviewed-by: David Sterba Signed-off-by: David Sterba

btrfs: Remove __ prefix from btrfs_block_rsv_release

2020-03-23T16:01:55Z

Currently the non-prefixed version is a simple wrapper used to hide the 4th argument of the prefixed version. This doesn't bring much value in practice and only makes the code harder to follow by adding another level of indirection. Rectify this by removing the __ prefix and have only one public function to release bytes from a block reservation. No semantic changes. Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov Reviewed-by: David Sterba Signed-off-by: David Sterba

btrfs: add wrapper for transaction abort predicate

2020-03-23T16:01:34Z

The status of aborted transaction can change between calls and it needs to be accessed by READ_ONCE. Add a helper that also wraps the unlikely hint. Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik Signed-off-by: David Sterba

btrfs: use the file extent tree infrastructure

2020-03-23T16:01:24Z

We want to use this everywhere we modify the file extent items permanently. These include: 1) Inserting new file extents for writes and prealloc extents. 2) Truncating inode items. 3) btrfs_cont_expand(). 4) Insert inline extents. 5) Insert new extents from log replay. 6) Insert a new extent for clone, as it could be past i_size. 7) Hole punching For hole punching in particular it might seem it's not necessary because anybody extending would use btrfs_cont_expand, however there is a corner that still can give us trouble. Start with an empty file and fallocate KEEP_SIZE 1M-2M We now have a 0 length file, and a hole file extent from 0-1M, and a prealloc extent from 1M-2M. Now punch 1M-1.5M Because this is past i_size we have [HOLE EXTENT][ NOTHING ][PREALLOC] [0 1M][1M 1.5M][1.5M 2M] with an i_size of 0. Now if we pwrite 0-1.5M we'll increas our i_size to 1.5M, but our disk_i_size is still 0 until the ordered extent completes. However if we now immediately truncate 2M on the file we'll just call btrfs_cont_expand(inode, 1.5M, 2M), since our old i_size is 1.5M. If we commit the transaction here and crash we'll expose the gap. To fix this we need to clear the file extent mapping for the range that we punched but didn't insert a corresponding file extent for. This will mean the truncate will only get an disk_i_size set to 1M if we crash before the finish ordered io happens. I've written an xfstest to reproduce the problem and validate this fix. Reviewed-by: Filipe Manana Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik Signed-off-by: David Sterba

btrfs: use refcount_inc_not_zero in kill_all_nodes

2019-11-18T11:46:51Z

We hit the following warning while running down a different problem [ 6197.175850] ------------[ cut here ]------------ [ 6197.185082] refcount_t: underflow; use-after-free. [ 6197.194704] WARNING: CPU: 47 PID: 966 at lib/refcount.c:190 refcount_sub_and_test_checked+0x53/0x60 [ 6197.521792] Call Trace: [ 6197.526687] __btrfs_release_delayed_node+0x76/0x1c0 [ 6197.536615] btrfs_kill_all_delayed_nodes+0xec/0x130 [ 6197.546532] ? __btrfs_btree_balance_dirty+0x60/0x60 [ 6197.556482] btrfs_clean_one_deleted_snapshot+0x71/0xd0 [ 6197.566910] cleaner_kthread+0xfa/0x120 [ 6197.574573] kthread+0x111/0x130 [ 6197.581022] ? kthread_create_on_node+0x60/0x60 [ 6197.590086] ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30 [ 6197.597228] ---[ end trace 424bb7ae00509f56 ]--- This is because the free side drops the ref without the lock, and then takes the lock if our refcount is 0. So you can have nodes on the tree that have a refcount of 0. Fix this by zero'ing out that element in our temporary array so we don't try to kill it again. CC: stable@vger.kernel.org # 4.14+ Reviewed-by: Nikolay Borisov Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik Reviewed-by: David Sterba [ add comment ] Signed-off-by: David Sterba

btrfs: move btrfs_unlock_up_safe to other locking functions

2019-11-18T11:46:49Z

The function belongs to the family of locking functions, so move it there. The 'noinline' keyword is dropped as it's now an exported function that does not need it. Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik Signed-off-by: David Sterba

btrfs: get rid of unique workqueue helper functions

2019-11-18T11:46:48Z

Commit 9e0af2376434 ("Btrfs: fix task hang under heavy compressed write") worked around the issue that a recycled work item could get a false dependency on the original work item due to how the workqueue code guarantees non-reentrancy. It did so by giving different work functions to different types of work. However, the fixes in the previous few patches are more complete, as they prevent a work item from being recycled at all (except for a tiny window that the kernel workqueue code handles for us). This obsoletes the previous fix, so we don't need the unique helpers for correctness. The only other reason to keep them would be so they show up in stack traces, but they always seem to be optimized to a tail call, so they don't show up anyways. So, let's just get rid of the extra indirection. While we're here, rename normal_work_helper() to the more informative btrfs_work_helper(). Reviewed-by: Nikolay Borisov Reviewed-by: Filipe Manana Signed-off-by: Omar Sandoval Reviewed-by: David Sterba Signed-off-by: David Sterba

btrfs: move cond_wake_up functions out of ctree

2019-09-09T12:59:15Z

The file ctree.h serves as a header for everything and has become quite bloated. Split some helpers that are generic and create a new file that should be the catch-all for code that's not btrfs-specific. Reviewed-by: Johannes Thumshirn Signed-off-by: David Sterba

btrfs: only reserve metadata_size for inodes

2019-09-09T12:59:13Z

Historically we reserved worst case for every btree operation, and generally speaking we want to do that in cases where it could be the worst case. However for updating inodes we know the inode items are already in the tree, so it will only be an update operation and never an insert operation. This allows us to always reserve only the metadata_size amount for inode updates rather than the insert_metadata_size amount. Reviewed-by: Nikolay Borisov Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik Signed-off-by: David Sterba

btrfs: rename the btrfs_calc_*_metadata_size helpers

2019-09-09T12:59:13Z

btrfs_calc_trunc_metadata_size differs from trans_metadata_size in that it doesn't take into account any splitting at the levels, because truncate will never split nodes. However truncate _and_ changing will never split nodes, so rename btrfs_calc_trunc_metadata_size to btrfs_calc_metadata_size. Also btrfs_calc_trans_metadata_size is purely for inserting items, so rename this to btrfs_calc_insert_metadata_size. Making these clearer will help when I start using them differently in upcoming patches. Reviewed-by: Nikolay Borisov Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik Reviewed-by: David Sterba Signed-off-by: David Sterba